Voters Turned Off by Religion in Politics

The Republican knee-jerk bowing to the religious right comes with a bite.  More Americans are walking away from organized religions, apparently in opposition to the infusion of religion into politics.

A new report, issued last week, found that 20 percent of all Americans – as many as 24 percent of males – no longer belong to a faith or want to.  They aren’t turning into agnostics or atheists; they are simply shunning the traditional religions and opting for nothing.

"This is a product of the involvement of the religious right in American politics and the increasing connection in Americans' minds, the minds of moderates and liberals, that religion equals conservative politics equals religion," said Claus Fischer, a researcher with the University of California-Berkeley, which joined with the University of California and Duke for the study.

Not surprisingly, the research found “40 percent of liberals claim they have no religion, compared to just 9 percent of conservatives.”

Sen. Ron Paul

Fischer said. "Increasingly, people identify and link organized religion with anti-gay attitudes, sexual conservatism, a whole range of those kinds of social cultural values.  One way you can think about it is, this is blowback."

That does not bode well for the Republicans, who have been shanghaied by the religious fanatics’ wing of the party.  Zealots like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan and former Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin only foreshadow more and steeper declines in public support.

If doubting that sailing off a right-wing cliff might not be the best policy, the Republican Party might consider some other statistics, in this case from the Pew Research Center.  The center’s February survey found that the Republican Party’s image is at an all-time low.  Some 62 percent of Americans in the survey said the GOP “is out of touch,” while 52 percent say “the party is too extreme.”

Only 33 percent of Americans view the party “favorably,” the survey reported.  No coincidentally, public support topped 50 percent before George W. Bush was elected president in 2000 and promptly began to plummet.

George, George W. and Jeb Bush

Looking at the dismal  numbers, Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, George W.’s brother and potential Republican president candidate, may consider reconsidering his comment that having the Bush name does not “carry any baggage.”  The survey results demonstrate conclusively that the Bush name is actually like strapping a freight train to a candidate’s back.

All anyone has to do is say “Bush,” and the audience either guffaws, gets violently ill or heads for the exits.

Jeb Bush could be a better president than his brother, but that’s a very low bar: his brother is already considered the worst president in American history.  There’s nowhere to go but up, although not far before running in Bush pere, who is also considered one of the worst presidents.

What a family history.

Other presidents with family relationships did much better:  John Adams and his son John Quincy were both respected although neither did their best work in office.  Franklin Roosevelt and cousin Theodore each rank among the greatest.  On the other hand, the Bushes more closely resemble William Henry Harrison, who died after a month in office without single accomplishment, and his great-grandson Benjamin, who was a one-term president famed for alienating everyone with his humor-less nature and pinched mind.

Even that history won’t undermine another Bush bid.  Americans are suckers for a familiar name, even of Jeb probably won’t carry Florida since residents already endured his style of inept management.

That may not matter, now that public opinion is deserting the Republican message.   The American Enterprise Institute noted in a recent survey that “Republicans committed political suicide (in 2012) by allowing a minority of right wing ideologues to dominate the stage. Their rhetoric completely turned off a huge swath of the nation against the party …”

Sen. Lindsey Graham

The Institute added, “Right wing fanatics make up a relatively small percentage of the Republican Party. Yet, their influence over the party’s platform is huge. It is clearly not a situation that the American electorate appreciates.”

Some Republicans have gotten the message.  Slammed by conservative Republicans for daring to propose compromise with the Democrats, Lindsay Graham (R-SC) is now considered the overwhelming favorite to retain his Senate seat.

“Politicians needn't kowtow to ideological groups,” he insisted.

If the rest of the Republican Party doesn’t follow his lead, the GOP can plan on bowing out of American political life.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.net.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols

TV Bible Series Perpetuates Mythology

Scene from The Bible

A lot of people have been watching the new miniseries on the Bible.  The first episode of the 10-part series drew 13.1 million viewers.  That was the most people to watch a telecast this year, but hardly a record.  More people saw Roots, the last episode of MASH and a host of other programs over the years, but it’s still a good result.

They got to see Noah’s Ark, Abraham and Moses.  Reviewers said the depictions were very realistic.

How could anyone know that?

Historians don’t.  They agree there’s nothing historically accurate in the Bible until the time of David.  He doesn’t show up until Episode 2 in this series.

Artist's view of the famous writing

No one dismisses biblical history lightly.  After all, billions of people throughout history have accepted the stories as accurate re-tellings of the distant past.  However, starting in the 1700s, the Bible has been thoroughly studied from an historical perspective and -- as the handwriting on the wall noted in another context -- “found wanting.”

The first studies looked at the texts.  Jean Astruc, a physician in 1700s France, figured out that the Old Testament had at least four different books that had been tied together by later editors.  He identified them as J, E, P and D.  J stood for Jehovah (the misspelling of Yahweh), the god cited in that portion; E for Elohim, the god of a second unit; P for priestly codes; and D for Deuteronomy.  

The JEPD theory has stood up to all studies and has helped explain duplicate stories of creation, Noah’s flood, Jacob’s dual names and David’s ascendancy etc..  Multiple ideas were simply combined.  

In addition, the research into word choice showed how these various tales were merged over time to create, for example, the account of Joseph being sold into slavery and then rising to power in Egypt. 

Gilgamesh

Early documents were uncovered that contained stories used as biblical sources, such as an Egyptian novel, prayers to other gods converted to use for Yahweh, sagas like the Babylonian Gilgamesh that provided the account of Noah, Sumerian legends that became the Garden of Eden and so on.

These once-familiar tales were edited by the Yahwists to match up with their beliefs.

These studies were augmented by archaeology, which became fashionable after Heinrich Schliemann excavated the ancient city of Troy in the late 1860s.  That inspired true believers to think that the spade could turn up proof of biblical accounts.

It did just the opposite.  Intensive research for more than 100 years did locate the Jericho of Joshua’s day and other ancient sites, but provided only contradictory evidence.  For example, there never were walls at Jericho to “come tumbling down,” a tale in episode 3 of the TV series.

No group of people lived in the Sinai Desert for 40 years or for any length of time.  Jerusalem was very tiny in David’s day, not the impressive capital of any nation.  In depth investigations into the Gospel accounts of Jesus found that they contradict each other and contain virtually no factual information.  

The findings have been devastating to claims of biblical inerrancy that in the 1970s, archaeologists abandoned the idea of uncovering any supporting facts.  The whole field of Biblical Archaeology simply disappeared.

The end result has been television shows designed to perpetuate myths in the guise of history, which is apropos considering the topic.  It’s exactly what the biblical authors were doing: writing history to conform to their beliefs. The Roman Catholic Church has conceded that point, agreeing that the Gospels only contain the “author’s beliefs,” not history. 

Burnett

Naturally, the folks behind the television show have let us know that something beyond their ken has taken notice of their actions.  Producer Mark Burnett (left) insists that “the hand of God was on this: the edit came together perfectly, the actors came together perfectly, it just comes to life.” 

Need more proof of divine involvement? “Weird things happened during filming,” he said. “Everybody would look at each other like, ‘Whoa.’”

For example, on a still night when Jesus and Nicodemus meet, Jesus said, “The Holy Spirit is like the wind.” Burnett said, “At that moment, a wind, like as if a 747 was taking off, blew his hair, almost blew the set over and sustained for 20 seconds across the desert.”

Or a costume disappeared.  “Four days later,” Burnett said, “a kid showed up from many, many, many miles away, who had been seeking us through the desert to return (it) to us. He didn’t know what it was why he should seek us, but he felt he had to return it.”

Then, the fellow collecting snakes found 42 of them, rather than the usual one or two, on the set where the cross was set up.  

Wow.

Funny, but Burnett ignored what would have been a true miracle – if anything slightly historically accurate had actually been depicted on the screen.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.net.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols; and Dummies Guide to Comparative Religion.  His books are available on Amazon.com, Kindle, bookstores and via various publishers.  He can also be followed on Twitter.

You can enroll in his on-line class, Comparative Religion for Dummies, at http://www.udemy.com/comparative-religion-for-dummies/?promote=1

Will New Pope End Chastity Requirement?

Celibacy is one of those religion-tinged issues that won’t die down.  The Roman Catholic Church has been earnestly trying to make priests into eunuchs for centuries, but every now and then, someone questions the concept.  They never got very far.  The Church has remained adamant that its clergy should pretend sex does not exist.

The need for a new pope has encouraged opponents of celibacy to raise the issue again.  They have some strong points.

For starters, the Church didn’t always require celibacy.  St. Peter, Jesus’ lead disciple, was married.  So were many of the early fathers of the faith.  They had to be.  They were Jewish, and that religion believes in the “be fruitful and multiply” directive in Genesis.

In fact, the folks who devised Catholicism would have been ignored if they weren’t married.  That’s one of the concepts behind the novel, The Da Vinci Code, which proposes that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.

Historically, a late 4^th century council finally decreed that "Bishops, presbyters, deacons, and others with a position in the ministry are to abstain completely from sexual intercourse with their wives and from the procreation of children. If anyone disobeys, he shall be removed from the clerical office.”

Clergy could be married, just not sexually active. 

That decision was, naturally, ignored.  In the 11^th and 12 centuries, Church officials were constantly complaining about priests with families.  Finally, in 1123, the First Lateran Council issued the following laws: 

Canon 3: We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, and subdeacons to associate with concubines and women, or to live with women other than such as the Nicene Council (canon 3) for reasons of necessity permitted, namely, the mother, sister, or aunt, or any such person concerning whom no suspicion could arise.

Canon 21: We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage. We decree in accordance with the definitions of the sacred canons, that marriages already contracted by such persons must be dissolved, and that the persons be condemned to do penance.

Despite that, marriage only became a complete block to priesthood starting with the 1917 Code of Canon Law.

Katharine von Bora, Luther's wife

The Church may want celibate priests, but human nature continually trumped religious intentions.  Sex has long been a great inducement for anything.  For example, Martin Luther almost immediately married a former nun (right) after leaving the Church and founding the Protestant movement.

He wrote later: "There is no more lovely, friendly, and charming relationship, communion, or company than a good marriage."

Then, too, the Church is coping with fewer priests.  Young men simply aren’t giving up the opportunity to have a family and children in the same numbers as before in order to distribute Communion.  From 1976 to 2010, according to the Vatican’s own statistics, the number of priests increased by just 1.8 percent while the religion added 59 percent more followers.

As a result, thousands of churches are missing priests to officiate over the sacramental duties.  To make matters worse, a large percentage of existing priests are in Europe, but most Catholics live elsewhere.

The Vatican is also coping with the reality that a large percentage of the remaining Catholic clergy are gay.  That’s only natural, considering that the men in a profession that doesn’t allow marriage are more likely not to be interested in marriage.   There are no statistics – few gay priests are likely to emerge from a closet any time soon – but the issue has been the subject of an internal Vatican report.

Married Anglican priest John Fleming

As a final note, the Church does allow married clergy. Mergers with the Anglican Church, among others, have meant the Church has added married clergy.  Those priests were allowed to stay with their wives.  In addition, in South America, where an unmarried man is not considered fit to counsel anyone, the Church permits clergy to marry. A bishop in Argentina left his position, married and founded the Movement of Married Priests and their Families in the 1960s.  The group now has links throughout the continent.

Under the circumstances, the Church finds itself in the awkward position of maintaining a rule that is not applied equally and is often ignored.  Nevertheless, it continues to argue for celibacy, quoting the New Testament texts that seem apropos, ironically using the same technique that opponents used in the early church while arguing on behalf of married priests.

A solution may be to make chastity a voluntary option.  After all, the ban on eating meat on Fridays was changed from compulsory to optional.  Allowing priests to marry is a vastly more significant issue, but at least there’s precedent to change a time-honored mandate.

The new pope will have the chance to introduce the change, culminating long years of effort to change an outdated priestly requirement.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.net.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols; and Dummies Guide to Comparative Religion.  His books are available on Amazon.com, Kindle, bookstores and via various publishers.  He can also be followed on Twitter.

You can enroll in his on-line class, Comparative Religion for Dummies, at http://www.udemy.com/comparative-religion-for-dummies/?promote=1

Signs of Godlessness are Everywhere

An older American Atheists billboard

Capitalizing on recent surveys showing a decline in religious beliefs and a growth of nonbelievers,  the American Atheists organization is celebrating its 50^th anniversary by putting up billboards in Texas that encourage Americans to “Go Godless Instead.”

The signs mostly quote conservative politicians who have called for more religion in American life and laws.  All the usual suspects are cited:  Sarah Palin: “We should create laws based on the God of the Bible,” which was actually a misquote and was corrected later.  The sentiment is accurate, though.

Former Republican Presidential aspirant and Senator Rick Santorum was quoted as saying “Our civil laws have to comport to a higher law.  God’s Law.”   Former House Speaker and Republican presidential aspirant Newt Gingrich was included, quoted as saying: “How can I trust you with power if you don’t pray?”

Another one sign attacks the Roman Catholic Church for its child-abuse scandal. 

Silverman

“We’re very proud of these billboards,” said American Atheists President Dave Silverman (right). “Prominent figures in the public sphere continue to make abhorrent statements, all justified by their religion. The time in American history where overt bigotry against atheists is acceptable is finally coming to an end, and good riddance. We invite reasonable people to stand up, come out, and join us in celebrating 50 years of fighting for the separation of church and state and the civil rights of atheists.”

Guaranteeing civil rights is a worthy cause, but atheists can forget about winning anyone’s mind or heart.

Their focus is on evidence of God’s existence.  In that, they are right: there isn’t any.  After all, clearly, the accounts in sacred books are contradictory and only add to the welter of conflicting religions.  But, religion isn’t about facts.  It’s about faith.

People believe because they have no choice.  It is nearly impossible for anyone to confront the apparent reality of momentary existence surrounded by endless eons of nothingness.   Few people are willing to contemplate the apparent truth that rich and poor, evil and good, share the same future.  The absolute meaninglessness of life would overwhelm most people.

It’s easier, both from a logical sense as well as psychologically, to create an imaginary god and pray to him, to write novels and call them sacred, to create a class of people ordained to dispense the “truth.”  It’s comforting; it provides emotional support.  Religion brings people together and serves as the glue that binds society.

God gene?

It’s why some scholars have proposed that humans come equipped with a “god” gene, a built-in commitment to religious belief that ensures frail humans could compete and eventually overcome the gigantic beasts and fierce predators in the world around us.

Atheists offer nothing but bleak honesty, a trait few humans excel at.  Just look at Congress.

Moreover, atheists offer no replacement for religion.  What else provides solace in times of sorrow, hope when all else seems lost, support in dire conditions?  What else confidently gives answers to questions that trouble us all? 

What else creates illusions that allow us to endure and accept that which would seem otherwise intolerable?

As one colleague once told me: “We need our illusions.”

Yes, we do.  We thrive on them.  Sexual allure is built on illusion; so is everything we think we know about life, our place in the universe and the future of mankind.

Atheists have no place in that.

The signs they erected in Dallas and Austin only remind us that they exist.  They don’t make atheism relevant. 

That’s why many humans shucked the pagan gods for one all-powerful god.  Jupiter may have wielded a mighty bolt of lightning, but could not comfort the sick or bless a marriage.  Mars fought blood wars, but never cradled a dying soldier in his arms or eased the pain for a widow.  In time, Jupiter, Mars and the rest simply became names in history books and quirky sobriquets of planets.

The gods were trumped by Jewish, Islamic and Christian charity, which became proverbial.  One of the five pillars of Islam is the requirement that believers help the poor. No pagan faith ever did that.

Until atheism can come up with that kind of approach and help ease the burdens of life, members will find that a few signs are nothing more than self-created writing on the wall.

Long-time religious historian Bill Lazarus regularly writes about religion and religious history.  He also speaks at various religious organizations throughout Florida.  You can reach him at www.williamplazarus.net.  He is the author of the famed Unauthorized Biography of Nostradamus; The Last Testament of Simon Peter; The Gospel Truth: Where Did the Gospel Writers Get Their Information; Noel: The Lore and Tradition of Christmas Carols; and Dummies Guide to Comparative Religion.  His books are available on Amazon.com, Kindle, bookstores and via various publishers.  He can also be followed on Twitter.

You can enroll in his on-line class, Comparative Religion for Dummies, at http://www.udemy.com/comparative-religion-for-dummies/?promote=1